mr. gladstone and genesis-第6章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



success　of　my　efforts。　I　only　wish　that　I　could　accept　all　the

products　of　Mr。　Gladstone's　gracious　appreciation；　but　there　is

one　about　which；　as　a　matter　of　honesty；　I　hesitate。　In　fact；　if

I　had　expressed　my　meaning　better　than　I　seem　to　have　done；　I

doubt　if　the　particular　proffer　of　Mr。　Gladstone's　thanks　would

have　been　made。



To　my　mind；　whatever　doctrine　professes　to　be　the　result　of　the

application　of　the　accepted　rules　of　inductive　and　deductive

logic　to　its　subject…matter；　and　which　accepts；　within　the

limits　which　it　sets　to　itself；　the　supremacy　of　reason；　is

Science。　Whether　the　subject…matter　consists　of　realities　or

unrealities；　truths　or　falsehoods；　is　quite　another　question。　I

conceive　that　ordinary　geometry　is　science；　by　reason　of　its

method；　and　I　also　believe　that　its　axioms；　definitions；　and

conclusions　are　all　true。　However；　there　is　a　geometry　of　four

dimensions；　which　I　also　believe　to　be　science；　because　its

method　professes　to　be　strictly　scientific。　It　is　true　that　I

cannot　conceive　four　dimensions　in　space；　and　therefore；　for　me；

the　whole　affair　is　unreal。　But　I　have　known　men　of　great

intellectual　powers　who　seemed　to　have　no　difficulty　either　in

conceiving　them；　or；　at　any　rate；　in　imagining　how　they　could

conceive　them；　and；　therefore；　four…dimensioned　geometry　comes

under　my　notion　of　science。　So　I　think　astrology　is　a　science；

in　so　far　as　it　professes　to　reason　logically　from　principles

established　by　just　inductive　methods。　To　prevent

misunderstanding；　perhaps　I　had　better　add　that　I　do　not　believe

one　whit　in　astrology；　but　no　more　do　I　believe　in　Ptolemaic

astronomy；　or　in　the　catastrophic　geology　of　my　youth；　although

these；　in　their　day；　claimedand；　to　my　mind；　rightly　claimed

the　name　of　science。　If　nothing　is　to　be　called　science　but　that

which　is　exactly　true　from　beginning　to　end；　I　am　afraid　there

is　very　little　science　in　the　world　outside　mathematics。

Among　the　physical　sciences；　I　do　not　know　that　any　could　claim

more　than　that　it　is　true　within　certain　limits；　so　narrow　that；

for　the　present　at　any　rate；　they　may　be　neglected。　If　such　is

the　case；　I　do　not　see　where　the　line　is　to　be　drawn　between

exactly　true；　partially　true；　and　mainly　untrue　forms　of

science。　And　what　I　have　said　about　the　current　theology　at　the

end　of　my　paper　＇supra　pp。　160…163＇　leaves；　I　think；　no

doubt　as　to　the　category　in　which　I　rank　it。　For　all　that；　I

think　it　would　be　not　only　unjust；　but　almost　impertinent；　to

refuse　the　name　of　science　to　the　〃Summa〃　of　St。　Thomas　or　to

the　〃Institutes〃　of　Calvin。



In　conclusion；　I　confess　that　my　supposed　〃unjaded　appetite〃　for

the　sort　of　controversy　in　which　it　needed　not　Mr。　Gladstone's

express　declaration　to　tell　us　he　is　far　better　practised　than　I

am　（though　probably；　without　another　express　declaration；　no　one

would　have　suspected　that　his　controversial　fires　are　burning

low）　is　already　satiated。



In　〃Elysium〃　we　conduct　scientific　discussions　in　a　different

medium；　and　we　are　liable　to　threatenings　of　asphyxia　in　that

〃atmosphere　of　contention〃　in　which　Mr。　Gladstone　has　been　able

to　live；　alert　and　vigorous　beyond　the　common　race　of　men；　as　if

it　were　purest　mountain　air。　I　trust　that　he　may　long　continue

to　seek　truth；　under　the　difficult　conditions　he　has　chosen　for

the　search；　with　unabated　energyI　had　almost　said　fire





May　age　not　wither　him；　nor　custom　stale

His　infinite　variety。





But　Elysium　suits　my　less　robust　constitution　better；　and　I　beg

leave　to　retire　thither；　not　sorry　for　my　experience　of　the

other　regionno　one　should　regret　experiencebut　determined

not　to　repeat　it；　at　any　rate　in　reference　to　the　〃plea

for　revelation。〃







NOTE　ON　THE　PROPER　SENSE　OF　THE　〃MOSAIC〃　NARRATIVE

OF　THE　CREATION。



It　has　been　objected　to　my　argument　from　Leviticus　（suprà

p。　170）　that　the　Hebrew　words　translated　by　〃creeping　things〃　in

Genesis　i。　24　and　Leviticus　xi。　29；　are　different；　namely；

〃reh…mes〃　in　the　former；　〃sheh…retz〃　in　the　latter。　The　obvious

reply　to　this　objection　is　that　the　question　is　not　one　of　words

but　of　the　meaning　of　words。　To　borrow　an　illustration　from　our

own　language；　if　〃crawling　things〃　had　been　used　by　the

translators　in　Genesis　and　〃creeping　things〃　in　Leviticus；　it

would　not　have　been　necessarily　implied　that　they　intended　to

denote　different　groups　of　animals。　〃Sheh…retz〃　is　employed　in　a

wider　sense　than　〃reh…mes。〃　There　are　〃sheh…retz〃　of　the　waters

of　the　earth；　of　the　air；　and　of　the　land。　Leviticus　speaks　of

land　reptiles；　among　other　animals；　as　〃sheh…retz〃；

Genesis　speaks　of　all　creeping　land　animals；　among　which　land

reptiles　are　necessarily　included；　as　〃reh…mes。〃

Our　translators；　therefore；　have　given　the　true　sense　when　they

render　both　〃sheh…retz〃　and　〃reh…mes〃　by　〃creeping　things。〃



Having　taken　a　good　deal　of　trouble　to　show　what　Genesis　i。…ii。

4　does　not　mean；　in　the　preceding　pages；　perhaps　it　may　be　well

that　I　should　briefly　give　my　opinion　as　to　what　it　does　mean。

I　conceive　that　the　unknown　author　of　this　part　of　the

Hexateuchal　compilation　believed；　and　meant　his　readers　to

believe；　that　his　words；　as　they　understood　themthat　is　to

say；　in　their　ordinary　natural　senseconveyed　the　〃actual

historical　truth。〃　When　he　says　that　such　and　such　things

happened；　I　believe　him　to　mean　that　they　actually　occurred　and

not　that　he　imagined　or　dreamed　them；　when　he　says　〃day；〃　I

believe　he　uses　the　word　in　the　popular　sense；　when　he　says

〃made〃　or　〃created；〃　I　believe　he　means　that　they　came　into

being　by　a　process　analogous　to　that　which　the　people　whom　he

addressed　called　〃making〃　or　〃creating〃；　and　I　think　that；

unless　we　forget　our　present　knowledge　of　nature；　and；　putting

ourselves　back　into　the　position　of　a　Phoenician　or　a　Chaldaean

philosopher；　start　from　his　conception　of　the　world；　we　shall

fail　to　grasp　the　meaning　of　the　Hebrew　writer。　We　must　conceive

the　earth　to　be　an　immovable；　more　or　less　flattened；　body；　with

the　vault　of　heaven　above；　the　watery　abyss　below　and　around。

We　must　imagine　sun；　moon；　and　stars　to　be　〃set〃　in　a

〃firmament〃　with；　or　in；　which　they　move；　and　above　which　is　yet

another　watery　mass。　We　must　consider　〃light〃　and　〃darkness〃　to

be　things；　the　alternation　of　which　constitutes　day　and　night；

independently　of　the　existence　of　sun；　moon；　and　stars。　We　must

further　suppose　that；　as　in　the　case　of　the　story　of　the　deluge；

the　Hebrew　writer　was　acquainted　with　a　Gentile　（probably

Chaldaean　or　Accadian）　account　of　the　origin　of　things；　in　which

he　substantially　believed；　but　which　he　stripped　of　all　its

idolatrous　associations　by　substituting　〃Elohim〃　for　Ea；　Anu；

Bel；　and　the　like。



From　this　point　of　view　the　first　verse　strikes　the　keynote　of

the　whole。　In　the　beginning　〃Elohim　created　the　heaven　and

the　earth。〃　Heaven　and　earth　were　not　primitive　existences　from

which　the　gods　proceeded；　as　the　Gentiles　taught；　on　the

contrary；　the　〃Powers〃　preceded　and　created　heaven　and　earth。

Whether　by　〃creation〃　is　meant　〃causing　to　be　where　nothing　was

before〃　or　〃shaping　of　something　which　pre…existed；〃　seems　to　me

to　be　an　insoluble　question。



As　I　have　pointed　out；　the　second　verse　has　an　interesting

parallel　in　Jeremiah　iv。　23：　〃I　beheld　the　earth；　and；　lo；　it

was　waste　and　void；　and　the　heavens；　and　they　had　no　light。〃

I　conceive　that　there　is　no　more　allusion　to　chaos　in　the　one

than　in　the　other。　The　earth…disk　lay　in　its　watery　envelope；

like　the　yolk　of　an　egg　in　the　glaire；　and　the　spirit；　or

breath；　of　Elohim　stirred　the　mass。　Light　was　created　as　a　thing

by　itself；　and　its　antithesis　〃darkness〃　as　another　thing。

It　was　supposed　to　be　the　nature　of　these　two　to　alternate；　and

a　pair　of　alternations　constituted　a　〃day〃　in　the　sense　of　an

unit　of　time。



The　next　step　was；　necessarily；　the　formation　of　tha